Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (IPIX)

[CallMeCrazy]

In a study, daptomycin was found to be noninferior to vancomycin for absssi and csssi infections:

Daptomycin has rapid concentration-dependent bactericidal activity against Gram-positive pathogens.[80,81] Its tissue penetration supports its use in the treatment of ABSSSI, and daptomycin was shown to be 'noninferior' to vancomycin and semisynthethic penicillins.[

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/827923_6

Since it appears that daptomycin and vancomycin are nearly equally effective against absssi, would not the insurance companies require that the cheaper vancomycin be used instead of the more expensive daptomycin (all other things being equal)?

If this is true, then when you call vancomycin the "drug of choice" don't you really mean the insurance companies drug of choice?

Why would the FDA hold-up Brilacidin's P3 so that it can be studied against vancomycin when it has not been fully tested against dapyomycin. This doesn't seem to make sense.

Anyone who can make some sense of this or tell me where my thinking is flawed, please feel free to respond.